streetfestival

Full report from Stat Can: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/11-631-x/11-631-x2024001-eng.htm

After rising to about 40% in April 2020, the percentage of Canadians working most of their hours from home in a given week was 20% in November 2023

Thank you. Based a quick internet search, I think y'all are talking about CPC leader Pierre Poilievre.

I think the Israeli genocide is benefiting conservative politicians, like Pierre. A lot of conservatives seem easily corralled into being blindly pro-Israel when it's conducive to Western interests, and so conservative politicians can pretty easily beat the pro-Israel drum to the nods of most of their base. Progressives (or non-conservatives) on the other hand are more split, and so their politicians are more hard pressed to say anything without ostracizing people they don't want to ostracize

Who or what is P/pipsqueak?

"Open for Businesses"

The links in the post credit clicks to (an Ad campaign on) reddit. Here's a clean/anonymous link: https://www.statcan.gc.ca/MBM

Yes. To me, giving public utilities to foreign private companies with additional taxpayer money on top of it helps destroy our democracy and national identity to the financial benefit of a small number of already extremely wealthy people

Great points. I am disgusted by and feel cheated and sabotaged by Doug Ford's moves

In a hypothetical situation where the dominance of the English language in Alberta was in question, the Albertan government would definitely try to enact English language laws. Same goes for my home province of Ontario.

Quebec’s language laws have always been ~~punitive, under the guise of~~ [about] protectionism. The value of language protectionism can be tough to understand if you speak English - the most powerful language in Canada and across the globe - as a first (and only) language

The headline of the article is misleading, and I think this person said it best:

Bueckert said the language the federal government chose is “so vague that anyone can project onto it what they want to think.”

The headline of the article is misleading, and I think this person said it best:

Bueckert said the language the federal government chose is "so vague that anyone can project onto it what they want to think."

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/ffgc.2023.1297301/full

We found that between 2005 and 2021, forestry in Canada represented a net source of carbon (annual mean = 90.8 Mt. CO2e), and that total area logged was a significant predictor of net forestry emissions. In contrast, Canada’s NIR reported a small net carbon sink during the same time period (annual mean = −4.7 Mt. CO2e).

We show this discrepancy can be explained by Canada’s GHG reporting approach that claims GHG emissions from wildfires are natural, but GHG removals from forests at the age of commercial maturity, despite being primarily natural disturbance origin, are anthropogenic. This reporting approach may lead to climate mitigation policies that are ineffectual or detrimental to reducing net carbon in the global atmosphere.

Me, personally, it's not a big deal. But in several ways Canadian identity is based on comparing ourselves with the United States, as if it were the only relevant comparator. I see this in policy and people's national identification. So, I do think a good number of Canadians dislike being mistaken for Americans because it doesn't align with their identity. Separate from that - and the context of this post is travel - there's a popular idea amongst Canadian travellers - especially the hostel-going type - that the world perceives Canadians better than Americans. So, many will display Canada flags when they travel to preemptively fend off the idea that they're American